The first international conference designed to question the scientific consensus on climate change is being sponsored by a right-wing American think-tank which receives money from the oil industry.
The same group has tried to undermine the link between passive smoking and health problems and has accepted donations from a major tobacco company.
The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change in New York appears to be a conventional exchange of ideas on the science of global warming. Yet it is organised by the Heartland Institute of Chicago, which has opposed much of the science of climate change and passive smoking.
Exxon, the oil giant, and Philip Morris, the tobacco company, have both donated money to it, although the institute is keeping its recent donations company. It is believed to be the first time that a direct link has emerged between anti-global warming sceptics funded by the oil industry and the opponents of the scientific evidence showing that passive smoking can damage people's health.
The Heartland Institute claims no money from energy companies is being used to support the conference. But one of the co-sponsors, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, has received funds from Texaco.
© 2008 The Independent
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
5 Comments so far
Show AllWhen does actively trying to harm, not just the nation but the world, become a treasonous act?
By legitimizing "junk science", then having its proclamations found lacking, hence all science is not to be trusted is analagous to the conservatives screwing up government and proclaiming, "See, big government is bad!"
Can't wait to hear Singer's song.
Seems that Big Oil and Big Tobacco have some things in common - such as using the very same scientists (ie Fred Singer) to promote both the idea that tobacco is safe and the idea that humans do not cause climate change:
The Denial Machine
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/denialmachine/video.html
RE: - Maybe tomorrow I'll find out what science Singer is referring to.
Someone should ask Singer how the same scientist can be an "expert" on both the effects of smoking and the effects of human activity on the environment. Strange how his name comes up in both my source and your source Sensato.
DeSmogBlog has a discussion about this so-called "conference":
http://www.desmogblog.com/desmog-on-the-ground-for-denial-a-palooza
Two corporate birds of a feather flocking together.